Posted on 01/08/2018 3:20:54 PM PST by Kaslin
RUSH: Weve got the Wolff book out there, and theres something about the Wolff book that it just hit me today, and I dont think anybody has put this together. If they have, I havent seen it. What is one of the big claims in this Wolff book? And that is that Trump never wanted to be president, right? Never expected to win, did not want to win. Melania Trump was in tears on election night after they won. Okay. Fine. Then why was Trump colluding with the Russians to tilt the election against Hillary? If he didnt want to win, what the hell was he colluding with anybody for to try to win?
Now, this Wolff book people dont know this this wolf book was supposed to be about the first hundred days, and it was supposed to have been out long before now. And Im wondering if this Wolff book ended up being a little bit delayed precisely because of that. You cannot put this book out with one of the central themes being that Donald Trump didnt want to win and didnt expect to win. You cant put that book out right smack-dab in all of that stuff last year about Trump colluding.
I mean, think about a years worth of stories in the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, with all these deep state people leaking and claiming things, there was never any evidence, but all of these leaks and all the claims in the Mueller investigation, the firing of Comey, all this stuff. If this book had come out and the author goes on TV, lets say in March or April saying, Yeah, the guy never wanted to be president. He never expected to win. If you want to undercut the Russia investigation, thats what you would do.
Now the Russia investigations kind of gone by the wayside. Now theyre looking at Trump colluding, or obstructing, I should say. And theyve dropped well, they havent dropped it, but in terms of the media and the daily soap opera script, the Trump-collusion-with-Russia angle has kind of been dropped and now theyre looking at obstruction and other kind of things.
But this just undercuts the whole premise of this last year, that Trump did not want to win, really didnt want to be president. If thats true, why would he have risked his business and his brand to collude with the Russians to win the election he didnt want to win? It doesnt add up. And that could be why Wolff waited to come out with this.
Remember, it was supposed to be about Trumps first 100 days, but he waited until Trump had completed 200 days in office to turn in the manuscript and all that. You suspect he was really waiting for the collusion narrative to collapse so that he wouldnt be attacked for undermining it, because he clearly would have undermined the whole thing.
If this book had come out six months ago think of that if this book had come out in September, it would have undermined everything they were using at that point to get rid of Trump. That didnt work. And it may well be this obstruction angle isnt working because now the entire focus is once again back to Trump being insane and unfit and unstable, which is also not new. Its something they have routinely used about every Republican president in our lifetimes.
Now, as to the Wolff book, I learned over the weekend that Im mentioned in this thing. Its not a big mention, but its totally false. And Im just gonna throw my experience of being in this book in the column of its fake. I mean, it is so untrue, its not even close. Theres not even a single word in this reference that is anywhere near the truth.
Grab audio sound bite number 11. The guy who read the book live I cant believe this, if youre gonna write a book, then do the audio version yourself. I do. Every one of the Rush Revere books I read. Can you imagine going out and buying the audio book Rush Revere Time-Travel Adventures with Exceptional Americans as read by, and then pick your favorite name.
Why wouldnt Wolff read his own book? Well, its hard. Yeah, it is hard. It takes weeks. And you cant make a single noise when youre narrating. If a paper crackles or if you pound a table or something, gotta go back and do it again. Its painstaking. Minor point.
By the way, do you know where Wolff went when he went to the White House? He was in the White House 20 or 30 times. You know where he went? You know where? His headquarters was Bannons office. According to Maggie Haberman of the New York Times, Wolffs you know, I have a question, before I get to this sound bite.
Look at what happened here. I saw a piece where somebody mentioned David Stockman and now Bannon. Theyre not the only two, but heres the thing. What did David Stockman do. Do you remember David Stockman? David Stockman was the Director of the Office of Management and Budget during the Reagan administration. And David Stockman went public, he called William Greider, who ended up at The Village Voice I think or something, he was New York Times, maybe the Washington Post.
He called William Greider, a reporter, and said, This is bogus. This is nothing but trickle-down. This is never gonna work. This Reagan tax cut plans absurd. Its obscene. And of course thats all it took. The Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the media has everything they need to begin their revisionist history about the Reagan tax cuts.
Okay, jump forward, heres Bannon, and Bannon is leaking like a sieve in the White House, and then who did he call? Kuttner, Robert Kuttner, well known leftist at The American Prospect and gave an interview that somebody says, Well, he thought was off the record.
Whats he calling this guy in the first place for? Heres the question. Why is it, be it the Reagan administration, be it the George W. Bush administration, be it this one, why is it that people in these Republican administrations feel the need to call the liberal media and unload?
Can you tell me, did anybody in the Clinton administration ever call here or National Review or, take your pick, Fox News, and unload about what was really going on in Clinton administration? No. Did anybody in the Obama administration ever betray it by calling or appearing on conservative media to undermine what was go? No. And so the question, why?
Why is it that almost every Republican administration theres at least one member who feels the need to call somebody in the liberal media and unload? There is an answer to this. And yet the libs never do it, they never betray, but thats not the sole answer. Its not a matter of, Well, we have people that are not that loyal. They betray. Thats not the answer. What do you think the answer is? I know the answer.
Snerdley is saying that he thinks they believe theyre bigger than the cause itself and that theyre investing in their own future. Okay, fine. But that still doesnt answer the question. Why call the liberal media? David Stockman could have called Bill Buckley at National Review. I mean, remember, the Reagan administration had no conservative media aside from William F. Buckley and National Review. That was it. But he still could have called Buckley. Could have called anybody there and unloaded. And he could have done it in a protective way, said, Look. Mr. Buckley, I dont think what were doing here is right. No. He called the New York Times or the Washington Post, I forget which, knowing full well why.
Bannon didnt call Fox News. Bannon calls Robert Kuttner at The American Prospect and apparently Maggie Haberman at the New York Times. Why? Your answer, they think theyre bigger than the cause, it probably would apply in some instances to Bannon, but I still dont think that explains it. Ill tell you right now what explains it. The left runs that town. The left runs the town. And if you want to be in the with the town, thats who you have to kowtow to.
I think it has to do with security, insecurity, confidence, lack of confidence, or what have you. But if youre a Democrat and youre working in the Obama administration, you already know that youre safe and protected, you are preferred, you have no reason to be nervous, you have no reason to be feeling persecuted or without any confidence. But if youre working for a Republican administration, and particularly this one, which is just reviled on a daily basis by the American left and the media, then its what Ive always said. The left runs that town, and if you want to be, whatever, in or accepted or included in that town, thats who you have to kowtow to.
Now, it still doesnt explain why the betrayal. Thats a whole other explanation. But the reason the media is called by people on the right and they never do it you know, somebody working for Obama would never call the Washington Post or the New York Times. Lets say Hillary was president. Lets do it this way. Lets say Hillarys president and somebody in her administration knows everything there is about Hillarys emails. You think they would call the New York Times, and if they did, would the New York Times publish it? No.
If Hillary Clinton had been elected, would there have ever been a story on Harvey Weinstein? I submit to you that there would not. The Golden Globes would not have been what they were last night had Hillary Clinton been elected because nobody, if there even had been somebody in the Hillary campaign who wanted to unload on Weinstein while shes president, or unburden themselves on Hillary and Huma and the emails and all this stuff, or the dossier you know, we wouldnt know anything about this dossier if Hillary had been elected. We wouldnt know how corrupt our deep state is. We wouldnt know any of this.
And even if members of the Hillary administration, had she won, called the media and told em this, they would have not run it. But when somebodys a member of a Republican administration and for some reason wants to unburden themselves or wants to betray, its apparently a no-brainer: Call the liberal media. And this is another reason why your average, ordinary Republican voter today cannot be talked out of his support for Donald Trump, because this kind of betrayal Trump voters and average, ordinary Republican voters are so used to that theyre fed up with.
But I think its a very interesting case study. Stockman, Bannon, and there have been others of lesser stature that have tried it. And even the FBI agent during the Clinton administration that wrote a book about the way Hillary and Bill treated uniformed (interruption) Gary Aldrich. Yeah. Its buried. Its buried. It remains a book, but its not hyped at all like Wolffs book is and the Drive-By Media ignored it totally. Anyway, back to this reference to me in the Wolff book. Holter Graham is the narrator. This is from Fire and Fury. I dont know what page or what chapter. It doesnt matter. Heres the bite.
NARRATOR: His funeral in Palm Beach on May 20th was quite a study in the currents of right-wing ambivalence and even mortification. Right-wing professionals remained passionate in their outward defense of Trump but were rattled, if not abashed, among one another. At the funeral, Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham struggled to parse support for Trumpism even as they distanced themselves from Trump himself.
RUSH: Now, this is at the Roger Ailes memorial, the funeral, what have you. And it was I mean, the Well, it was in May, May 20th. The dates right and thats all. At the funeral, nobody spoke other than members of the family. It was at the memorial that people took turns speaking. But, folks, I can tell you, Donald Trump never came up! The subject of Donald Trump was never discussed at the memorial, much less Trumpism. I dont even know what this means.
Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham struggled to parse support for Trumpism even as they distanced themselves from Trump hims ? And Wolff was there! And Wolff came up to me as the memorial ended and said, I think I Well, I introduced myself to him, and then he said, I think I owe you an apology. I said, What for? He said, Well, I misquoted you or got something wrong in a story some years ago. And I said, Well, you know, get in line. But this didnt happen. I dont even I really dont even understand what it means.
But at the memorial for Roger Ailes, there isnt a single person that Look, Trumps name may have come up with people telling stories (I dont even think that) but there was no discussion of the Trump presidency or of Ailes involvement in or Trumpism, and there certainly wasnt anybody who tried to distance themselves from Trump or Trumpism at the Roger Ailes memorial. This is entirely I mean, it is completely made up. I dont even understand what the basis for that little reference is. Cause its totally fake, a hundred percent.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Im trying to think about it, maybe you can people remember if its happened, but I dont think I have ever struggled on this program to parse support for Trumpism. You know what that means, right. Ah, Limbaugh really didnt want to support Trump. He thought he had to and so tried I dont think I have ever been halfway on this. And then this business about Laura Ingraham and Limbaugh distancing themselves from Trump himself? Have I ever done that here? No. Its just entirely, totally made up.
Try this headline. This is from Newsweek. Trump Could Destroy the Entire Human Species, Says Yale Psychiatrist Who Warned Congress Members. They say Trump is deranged and unfit? A Yale psychiatrist poisoning the minds of young students? Trump could destroy the entire human species? Via Twitter, he means, I guess?
Wuff is one of those fellows who should really try a combover.
Rush should know that most works of fiction are read by someone other than the author. Why should this one be any different?
Shoulda had Stephen King read it.
Notice how Wolf has a Bernie Sanders style accent from Brooklyn? He does not look much younger than Bernie. The two may be best buds. They tend to think alike,
Wolff is from New Jersey.
The Kitty Kelly of politics
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.